Views
3 years ago

An Evidence Based Model Sign Code - College of Design ...

An Evidence Based Model Sign Code - College of Design ...

Solution: The distance

Solution: The distance from the center of the sign to the center of the far lane is: • 6 12-6+16=82 ft. The distance from the sign to the point at which the driver needs to be able to read the sign (Visual Reaction Distance) is: • 1.47 45 (7+0.14 10)=555.66 ft Equation 4. For a vertical viewing angle of 5° and a driver eye height of 3.5 ft, Equation 4 can be shorted to that shown in Equation 5. Table 8 summarizes the results of applying this table to a range of letter heights based on a legibility index of 30 ft/in. The line of sign from the vehicle to the sign is: • 82 2 + 555.56 2 = 561.68 ft Using a legibility index of 30 ft/in, the minimum letter height is: • 561.68/30=18.7 inches, use 19 inches. The minimum sign size area is: • 19 2 /144 10 2.5=62.7 ft 2 , use 63 ft 2 Maximum sign height, based on a 5° vertical angle, is: • 0.087 19 30+3.5=53.1 ft, use 53 ft Equation 5. Table 8. Maximum Sign Height Guidelines EXAMPLES FOR USING THE FORMULAS AND TABLES The following presents an example of how to use the information in this document to determine the appropriate minimum letter height, minimum sign size, and maximum sign height given inputs that represent the viewing environment. Given: • An arterial roadway with three lanes in each direction and a 16 ft raised median. • The speed limit on the road is 45 mph. • The center of the sign is assumed to be located 30 ft from the edge of the road. • The sign is in an area with little competition for the driver’s visual attention. • There are 10 letters and no graphics in the sign. Technical Information Related to Electronic Message Displays Electronic Message Displays (EMDs), which are also referred to as electronic message centers or electronic changeable copy signs, are a type of private sector sign that may require special treatment in the development of a model sign ordinance. These signs have unique capabilities to provide a variety of messages in a range of formats. At the low end of the technology scale, these signs use a matrix arrangement to present text and simple graphics. The message or messages may be displayed in a static mode or may scroll or flash. At the high end of the technology scale, these signs are capable of providing television quality types of images. The use of large EMDs is more common for off-premise signing, typically in billboard-type applications. On-premise use of EMDs is more commonly limited to static, scrolling, or alternating messages. The technology for EMDs is far ahead of the research on their impacts and guidelines for use. A 2005 report by the United States Sign Council (Garvey and Pietrucha 2005) indicated that “there has been little research conducted specifically on commercial EMCs.” As such, this Technical Report and model sign code contains relatively little information regarding these types of signs. A Legal and Technical Exploration of On-Premise Sign Regulation: An Evidence Based-Model Sign Code 28

References Bertucci, A.D., R.B. Crawford, P.M. Garvey, P.J. Tantala, and M. Moir. On Premise Signs, United States Sign Council Best Practices Standards. A Research Based Approach To: Sign Size, Sign Legibility, Sign Height. United States Sign Council, 2003. Carlson, P.J. and H.G. Hawkins, Jr. Minimum Retroreflectivity Values for Overhead Guide Signs and Street Name Signs. Research Report FHWA-RD-03-082, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, Virginia, December 2003. Forbes, T.W., and R.S. Holmes. Legibility Distances of Highway Destination Signs in Relation to Letter Height, Width, and Reflectorization. In Highway Research Board Proceedings, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., Vol. 19, 1939, pp. 321-335. Forbes, T.W., K. Moscowitz, and G. Morgan. A Comparison of Lowercase and Capital Letters for Highway Signs. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1951, pp. 355-373. Garvey, P.M., A.Z. Zineddin, R.J. Porter, and M.T. Pietrucha. Real World On-Premise Sign Visibility: The Impact of the Driving Task on Sign Detection and Legibility, United States Sign Council Foundation, 2002. Garvey, P.M. Environmental Impact of On-Premise Identification Sign Lighting: with Respect to Potential Light Trespass, Sky Glow and Glare. United States Sign Council Foundation Inc., 2004 Garvey, P.M. C. Ramaswamy, R. Ghebrial, M. De la Riva, and M.T. Pietrucha. Relative Visibility of Internally and Externally Illuminated On-Premise Signs, United States Sign Council Foundation, 2004. Garvey, P.M. On-Premise Signs Determination of Parallel Sign Legibility and Letter Heights, United States Sign Council Foundation, 2006. Garvey, P.M., M.T. Pietrucha and I. Cruzado. The Effects of Internally Illuminated On-Premise Sign Brightness on Nighttime Sign Visibility and Traffic Safety, United States Sign Council Foundation Inc., December. 2008 Garvey, P.M., M.T. Pietrucha, S. Damin, and D. Deptuch. Internal vs. External On-Premise Sign Lighting: Visibility and Safety in the Real World, United States Sign Council Foundation, February 2009. Garvey, P.M., M.T. Pietrucha. Electronic Message Center Research Review. United States Sign Council, Bristol, PA, 2005. Griffin J.R. and J.E. Bailey. Horizontal Obliquity: Word Readability and Logo Identification, 2002. Gordon, D.A. Night Visibility of Overhead Guide Signs: A Review of the Literature. FHWA-RD-84-087, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., October 1984. Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice – Part 8 – Traffic Control Devices. AUSTROADS Publication Number AP-11.9/88, Sydney, Australia, 1988. Hawkins, Jr., H.G., M.D. Wooldridge, A.B. Kelly, D.L. Picha, and F.K. Greene. Legibility Comparison of Three Freeway Guide Signs Alphabets. Research Report 1276-1F, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, Texas, May 1999. Jenkins, S.E. and F.R. Gennaoui, Terminal Values of Road Signs, Australian Road Research Board Ltd (ARRB), Special Report 49, Victoria, Australia, 1991. Mace, D.J., R.S., Hostetter, L.E. Pollack, and W.D. Sweig. Minimal Luminance Requirements for Official Highway Signs. FHWA/RD-86/151, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1986. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. 2003, http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov, accessed October 20, 2007. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. 2009, http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov, accessed January 31, 2011. Olson, P.L.. Forensic Aspects of Driver Perception and Response. Lawyers and Judges Publishing Company, 1996. The Signage Sourcebook: A Signage Handbook, First Edition. U.S. Small Business Administration, Washington, D.C., The Signage Foundation for Communication Excellence, Sherwood, Oregon, 2003. A Legal and Technical Exploration of On-Premise Sign Regulation: An Evidence Based-Model Sign Code 29

Part 2 - Evidence Based Design - American College of Healthcare ...
Signs in the Downtown Appearance Code and Design Guidelines
Ordinance Amending the Sign Code. - City of San José
1 ZONING CODE APPENDIX B SIGN DESIGN ... - City of Kent
High-Order Luminance Modeling for 3-D Model-Based Coding of ...
Model Based Design of Regulated Bidirectional ZVS ... - ijcee
Using Model Based Design to Support Fuel ... - Autonomie
Modeling, Analysis and Design for Multi-robot Exploration Based on ...
Working Group in Model-based Design and Reasoning - Artificial ...
abstract models of noc-based mpsocs for design space exploration
Digital Systems Modeling Chapter 2 VHDL-Based Design - index